Re: [PATCH] thermal/lib: Fix memory leak on error in thermal_genl_auto()

[Daniel Lezcano]

On 24/10/2024 15:18, Rafael J. Wysocki wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2024 at 2:57 PM Daniel Lezcano
> <daniel.lezcano@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > On 24/10/2024 14:02, Markus Elfring wrote:
> > > > The function thermal_genl_auto() does not free the allocated message
> > > > in the error path. Fix that by putting a out label and jump to it
> > > > which will free the message instead of directly returning an error.
> > >
> > > Would you like to add any tags (like “Fixes” and “Cc”) accordingly?
> > > https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/linux.git/tree/Documentation/process/submitting-patches.rst?h=v6.12-rc4#n145
> > >
> > >
> > > …
> > > > +++ b/tools/lib/thermal/commands.c
> > > > @@ -375,27 +375,30 @@ static thermal_error_t thermal_genl_auto(struct thermal_handler *th, cmd_cb_t cm
> > > >                                        struct cmd_param *param,
> > > >                                        int cmd, int flags, void *arg)
> > > >    {
> > > > +    thermal_error_t ret = THERMAL_ERROR;
> > > >       struct nl_msg *msg;
> > > >       void *hdr;
> > > >
> > > >       msg = nlmsg_alloc();
> > > >       if (!msg)
> > > > -            return THERMAL_ERROR;
> > > > +            goto out;
> > > …
> > >
> > > Is it really reasonable to pass a null pointer (from a failed function call)
> > > to a subsequent nlmsg_free() call?
> >
> > You are right, I should return here :S
>
> Do you want to respin it?
>
> Alternatively, I can fix it up when applying the patch.

If you don't mind I would prefer to apply the lib patches

For correctness, I'll send a V2 with the return fixed


--
<http://www.linaro.org/> Linaro.org │ Open source software for ARM SoCs

Follow Linaro:  <http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linaro> Facebook |
<http://twitter.com/#!/linaroorg> Twitter |
<http://www.linaro.org/linaro-blog/> Blog